Under the Act of July 1, 1918, which gave a remedy against the
United States for the unlicensed use of a patented invention, and
provides that compensation to the owners in such cases shall be
reasonable and "entire," interest on the amount of the damages
should be allowed. P.
282 U. S. 509.
69 Ct.Cls. 153 reversed.
Certiorari,
post, p. 817, to review a judgment of the
Court of Claims disallowing interest in a suit against the United
States for unlicensed use of a patent.
MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is a suit under the Act of July 1, 1918, c. 114, 40 Stat.
704, 705, U.S.Code, Title 35, § 68, to recover for the unlicensed
use of a patented invention. The liability of the United States is
established by the findings of the Court of Claims, and is not
disputed. Neither is there any dispute that the profits that the
plaintiff would have made are a proper measure of the damages
suffered. The Court of Claims, however, ruled that interest should
not be allowed upon the amount so fixed, and a writ of certiorari
was granted by this Court upon that question.
The Government, without formally confessing error, states its
belief that interest should have been allowed.
Page 282 U. S. 509
The statute grants "recovery of his reasonable and entire
compensation for such use." We are of opinion that interest should
be allowed in order to make the compensation "entire." In addition
to the purpose of the word adverted to in
Richmond Screw Anchor
Co. v. United States, 275 U. S. 331,
275 U. S. 343,
we cannot doubt that it was intended to accomplish complete justice
as between the plaintiff and the United States.
See Seaboard
Air Line R. Co. v. United States, 261 U.
S. 299;
Brooks-Scanlon Corp. v. United States,
265 U. S. 106;
Liggett & Myers Tobacco Co. v. United States,
274 U. S. 215;
Phelps v. United States, 274 U. S. 341.
Judgment reversed.